Kaczkowski v. Bolubasz case brief

Kaczkowski v. Bolubasz case brief summary
421 A.2d 1027 (Pa. 1980)

SYNOPSIS:
Appellant estate sought review of an order of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, which affirmed an order of the trial court finding appellee driver liable but refusing to allow appellant to offer expert testimony on the impact of inflation and increased productivity on the decedent's future earning capacity in appellant's wrongful death action.

OVERVIEW:
-Appellant estate's decedent was killed while riding as a passenger in a vehicle driven by appellee driver, and appellant filed a wrongful death action against appellee.
-The trial court found appellee liable, but refused to allow appellant to offer evidence on the effects of inflation and increased productivity on the decedent's future earning capacity.
-The superior court affirmed the decision of the trial court.

HOLDING:
On appeal, the court reversed and remanded for a new trial on the question of damages in order to allow appellant to present evidence on the decedent's lost future productivity.

ANALYSIS:
-The court overruled the holding of Havens v. Tonner, 365 A.2d 1271 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1976), which disallowed consideration of the impact of inflation and lost future productivity in calculating lost future earnings.
-The court adopted the rule that lost potential productivity was to be considered in determining the amount of the lost future earnings component of damage awards.
-The court found as a matter of law that future inflation and future interest rates were to be presumed to be equal and to offset each other.

RULES:
-Damages will be awarded for lost future earnings that compensate the victim to the full extent of the injury sustained.
-Upon proper foundation, the trial court shall consider the victim's lost future productivity. Moreover, the court finds as a matter of law that future inflation shall be presumed equal to future interest rates with these factors offsetting.
-Thus, the courts are instructed to abandon the practice of discounting lost future earnings.
-By this method, the court is able to reflect the impact of inflation in these cases without specifically submitting this question to the jury

OUTCOME: The court reversed the order of the lower court and remanded the case for a new trial on the question of damages in order to allow appellant estate to offer evidence on decedent's lost future productivity and for the lower court to enter a damage award using the court's new standard for accommodating inflation.

---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?


-->